Hi Pete,
Yes, indeed. From my reading of the listserv, discussions between Carl and Andy (and perhaps you?) eventually lead to the articulation of DCAM. (in retrospect there is alot of reading between the lines of the published reports/list traffic of stuff that happened in f2f meetings).
In the context of this conversation, I wouldn't want to point at lots of OAI records as "examples" that we are trying to model here because of that chronology.
Thanks for reposting those links.
Cheers,
Richard
On Jul 15, 2012, at 8:46 AM, Pete Johnston wrote:
> Hi Richard,
>
> On 14 July 2012 20:46, Richard Urban <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> The other culprit is OAI-DC model, which is not DCAM compliant IMHO.
>
> oai_dc preceded the DCAM by several years so it wasn't created with
> the DCAM in mind, but FWIW I had a stab at formulating a
> DCAM/DSP-based account of "Simple Dublin Core" and oai_dc here
>
> http://efoundations.typepad.com/efoundations/2009/10/what-is-simple-dublin-core.html
>
> See also
>
> http://efoundations.typepad.com/efoundations/2009/11/simple-dc-revisited.html
>
> (I never did finish the promised "Qualified DC" post as I ended up
> trying to encompass so many different interpretations of what people
> thought that term meant that it seemed a bit pointless!)
>
> Pete
>
> --
> Pete Johnston
>
|